In recent years, the issue of mass shootings has risen to national prominence. In particular, publicly available data shows that there were at least 146 mass shootings in the United States between 1967 and 2017, with an average of eight fatalities (including the perpetrator); here we are using the definition of at least four or more persons shot or killed as comprising a mass shooting—other definitions result in far higher numbers of mass shootings. Numerous solutions have been proposed to lower the number of mass shootings. These solutions include, for example, banning certain firearms, raising the minimum age of a person to purchase certain firearms, or adding additional mental health requirements for the purchase of a firearm. All of these solutions require changes to the law, which, in the present political climate is far from certain. In addition, various studies appear to demonstrate that some of these solutions may not be effective.
One solution that has been proposed that would not require changing “gun laws” is adding armed guards to various “target” locations, such as schools. For example, it has been proposed to arm school teachers. The viability of such an approach is questionable—school teachers generally are not trained in the use of firearms, and the use of firearms by untrained persons may exacerbate a dangerous situation. In particular, the possibility of an untrained person accidentally harming a child will likely prevent the widespread deployment of armed school teachers. However, the use of a standoff non-lethal device in such a circumstance may be appropriate.
In recent years, security forces, including military and police forces, have deployed non-lethal devices in increasing numbers. For example, high intensity and laser light can present a glare that degrades vision and cause discomfort for the target. High-intensity light can also momentarily blind or dazzle the target, resulting in a temporary loss of visual sensitivity after the light source is removed, and can potentially result in disorientation and nausea. Lasers have been found to be particularly useful as a non-lethal high-intensity light device. However, lasers can also cause irreversible retinal disorder, which is banned in most cases by the Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons. Accordingly, a balance must be struck between providing a laser that is intense enough to dazzle a hostile actor, but not intense enough to cause irreversible retinal disorder to a target.
Various guidelines including ANSI Z136.1 have been developed regarding the maximum permissible exposure to laser light that an eye can withstand without suffering irreversible retinal disorder. Generally, the maximum level of tolerable exposure is a function of the laser wavelength, laser intensity as measured in milliwatts per square centimeter (mW/cm2), and the duration of the exposure. For purposes of calculating the exposure duration, the time is typically assumed to be 0.25 s; i.e., the length of time before a blink is complete.
A number of prior art dazzlers have been developed. In particular, a number of solutions have been developed for or by the United States Military. Some of these can be found in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,142,650 and 6,431,732. Both of these detail cylindrical hand-held or pedestal mounted laser systems suitable for military use. However, these prior art systems are deficient in a number of ways. First, the use of a hand-held or pedestal mounted laser system can be difficult or inconvenient to aim. Second, the range of the prior art systems is limited, at least partially due to the difficulty in aiming. Third, the prior art systems generally require that the user of the dazzler place herself or himself in harms way. All of these are deficiencies that the present disclosure seeks to overcome.